VAJIRAM & RAVI

Institute for IAS Examination

Criminalisation
of Politics
Artistic Representation
Criminalisation of Politics
Criminalization of politics is defined as the situation when criminals
participate in the politics of the government, i.e., contest elections
and get elected to the Parliament and State Legislatures.

Factors Responsible
• Nexus between politicians and criminals. Politicians provide
protection to criminals and in return criminals provide money and
muscle power for the politicican to help win the elections.
• Inefficient criminal justice system wherein delayed and faulty
investigation further leads to delay in adjudication.
• Low conviction rate compounds the problem. As per NCRB Report,
conviction rate stands at 40% for ordinary crimes and 20% for
heinous crimes.
• Under FPTP System, in a multi cornered contest, even 30% of vote
makes you win and criminals do not find it difficult to obtain the
desired votes.
• Voters lack awareness about the antecedent of the contesting
candidates.
• Declining value system in society wherein parties focus on winning
rather than maintaining the sanctity of democratic process.
• Lack of comprehensive laws and rules for governing the procedure
of the election.

C A SE S
C A SES
1 8 25

C A SES
2

A SES S
C SE
12 5 CA
Number of Criminals in Parliament
Lok Sabha Statistics

Close to 43% of the 2019 Lok Sabha polls have criminal cases
against them, according to the Association for Democratic Reforms.

National Election Watch and Association for Democratic

Reforms (ADR) have analysed the self-sworn affidavits of
539 out of 542 Winners in the Lok Sabha 2019 Elections.

233 (43%)
159 (29%)

Winners Winners with

with Criminal Cases Serious Criminal Cases

475 (88%)
Rs 20.93 Cr.
Crorepati Winners Average Assets
of Winners

* rape, murder, kidnapping, crime against women, etc.

 Figure : State Wise Winners with Declared Criminal cases

Source: adrindia.org

Chances of Winning on the basis

of Assets
The chance of winning for a crorepati candidate in the Lok Sabha
2019 is 21%, whereas chance of winning for a candidate with assets
less than Rs. 1 crore is 1%.

Value of assets(Rs.)
Rajya Sabha Statistics

National Election Watch and Association for Democratic Reforms

(ADR) have analyzed the criminal, financial and other background
details of 226 out of 233 sitting MPs.

National Election Watch and Association for Democratic

Reforms (ADR) have analyzed the criminal, financial and
other background details of 226 out of 233 sitting MPs.

71 (31%)
37 (16%)

Winners Winners with

with Criminal Cases Serious Criminal Cases

197 (80%)
Rs 79.54 Cr.
Crorepati Winners Average Assets
of Winners
 Analysis of Winners on the basis of

LOK SABH A
Total - 539

Gender
Total - 539
Men - 85.7%

Men - 462
Women - 77

Total - 539

Women - 14.3%

R A J YA S A B H A

Total - 226

Total - 226 Gender

Men - 86.3%
Men - 195
Women - 31

Total - 226

Women - 13.7%
Consequences of Criminalisation
of Politics
• The law-breakers become law-makers; this affects the efficacy
of the democratic process in delivering good governance.
• Increased circulation of black money and corruption in public
life due to use of money and muscle power.
• State institutions like the Judiciary, the legislature and the
executives and bureaucracy come under the influence of
criminals and the administration losses its effectiveness in
governance.
• The use of muscle power promotes a culture of violence in
society which disturbs law and order and peace and stability in
society.
• The legislature has failed to enact necessary laws on time
thereby reducing the effectiveness of the administration.
Measures
Judicial Measures

• In 1997 the Supreme Court directed all the High Courts not to
suspend the conviction of a person who has been convicted and
sentenced by a trial court under the Prevention of Corruption Act,
1985.
• UoI Vs. ADR, 2002 case: Right to Know about any criminal cases
pending against the contesting candidates is a Fundamental Right
under Article 19 (1)(a).
• Lily Thomas Vs. UoI, 2013 case: Disqualification of MP/MLA
under Section 8(4) of the RPA 1951 if convicted and sentenced to
not less than 2 years of imprisonment.
• People Union for Civil Liberties Vs. UoI 2013 case: Citizens under
Article 19 (1) (a) read with Article 21 enjoy the right to negative
vote.
• In PIL Foundation Vs UoI 2014 case: The Supreme Court directed
all the trial courts to expedite and dispose off the criminal cases
involving a sitting MP or MLA.
• February 2020 directions by SC: The SC ordered political parties
to Publish the entire criminal history of their candidates along with
the reasons to field suspected criminals over decent people.
• Supreme Court modified 2020 judgment: imposes fine on various
political parties for covering up from voters the criminal past of
the candidate they had fielded in the Bihar Assembly Polls (2021).
Election Commission Measures:

• In August 1997 the ECI directed all the ROs to reject the
nomination papers of any convicted candidate even if his
sentence is suspended.

Recommendation for the decriminalization of politics:

• The two-ballot electoral system (winner gets > 50% of the valid
votes polled) instead of the FPTP electoral system.
▪ If no candidate obtains the necessary majority of votes then the
two candidates who obtained the largest number of votes polled
should be allowed to contest in the second round of elections.
This will discourage criminals from contesting elections.
• Introduced the right to reject in favor of the voters.
• If a person is found guilty of offenses by the commission of
inquiry he shall be disqualified from contesting elections till he
gets his name cleared in a court of law.
• If a person is accused of a serious crime and a court of law has
framed criminal charges against him then he shall be disqualified
from contesting elections because prima facie the court suspects
that the accused might have been involved in the crime.
▪ However, to prevent the ruling party from misusing the provision,
only cases that have been filed 6 months before the holding of
the elections shall alone be subjected to disqualification.
• Under Section 125 (a) of the RPA 1951 maximum punishment of
6 months for filing false affidavits must be raised to not less than
2 years of imprisonment.
 Click Here For

More Infographics

UPSC Current Affairs

Contact Us At

01141004700

Get Directions

Delhi Centre Chennai Centre

VAJIRAM & RAVI

Institute for IAS Examination